Jump to content

Doji Namika

Members
  • Content Count

    52
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Doji Namika

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Only if you actually stop reading there. But yes, I should have used another term than 'core rules'. The basic rules? The core of the system? Still, if I may be honest? If you missed what I meant when you read the sentence just after what you quoted and bolded, namely 'There are issues though.', followed by listing them, it is blindingly obvious that I did not give any false impressions that nothing is wrong, and to say I pulled a bait and switch is downright silly. This would hardly be the only rpg I enjoy, and whose game engine works wonderfully well, and still has issues. In fact, L5R 4e is a good example. We (as in the fandom) have filled more than one forum with what we think does not work well and our fixes for them. So, lighten up and don't assume everyone is posting in bad faith. This place is overly negative as is.
  2. I believe I indicated which parts are not working for me, so why the snark? The fact I also include which direction I'm looking to fix them for my table seems relevant as well. In fact, seems to fulfil your stated objective for this beta perfectly. Yes, I said I'm enjoying what's there. Yes, I believe their core rules, meaning the dice mechanic, stats and task resolution work. No, I most certainly did not state that everything works in my opinion and if my use of the words 'core rules' made you think that I meant every and all systems included in the beta, well, I do not. I find it hard to believe that the context of my post did not make that abundantly clear, but hey, I admit it was written in haste.
  3. Yes, they are less mishaps, more like super-opportunities. They have the complete opposite effect of what they intend to achieve.
  4. I am enjoying playing 5e. The core rules work wonderfully well. There are issues though. The most glaring ones are in writing clearly, organization, examples and explaining RAI. Approaches don't pose a problem, but I have found we are going more and more for the 7th Sea way of doing it. A good description trumps everything, so mostly fiction first and gm decides based on that, mostly following the player. There were no real issues with character generation. We did move the heritage table to one of the first steps though, just after Clan & Family. Overall, with some starting xp doesn't seem more restrictive then 4e to me. Turning strife into roleplay obviously requires buy-in from the players, as does any mechanic. My players have experience with taking cues from the more abstract, meta-mechanics and translating them into rp and using them to drive narrative, but I have some struggle more with this as others, stating it interferes with staying in character. I am playing with making giri/ninjo conflicts and disadvantages coming into play impact strife generation the most. Makes it matter, and more dangerous when it's appropriate and turns it more concrete at the same time, as well as make it a non-issue when it does not. It don't like the movement rules, so, they got replaced by a zone system. Void generation has been divorced from disadvantages and returned to the 'old' system. Sleep refills the pool and meditation and tea ceremony downtime actions restore 1. Don't mind the mechanic per se, but everyone at my table agreed it just didn't feel like void anymore and that that matters. Duels don't really work for us. It's easy for them to drag and they are rarely exciting. They need some sort of clock, like every round lowers TN/increases DV/Lethality. Katana breaking has been given the boot by overwhelming demand. Razor-sharp is just lost and that's it. Spell casting mishaps are not working as intended. Of course there are imbalances with techniques/kata's/... but that's expected. Anyway, overall we definitely are having fun with this game :-)
  5. Also, if the Scorpion runs off to assassinate your Lord after incapacitating the PC, said PC can just take some calming breaths and he's back in the fight. It might not have a real injury, but the pc was still knocked around pretty badly and needs to recover for a bit.
  6. Oh, forgot to mention that when engaged we have it it take a move to become disengaged, but you're still in the same zone. I believe that is about all. Keeps all the current rules intact, and adheres to the spirit of them, but is much less abstract and way easier to visualize.
  7. Zones are a concept from Fate actually. Ex3 is more like FFG's beta rules, though a bit better, as you don't get so much movement (unless you invest heavily in Athletics Charms). What makes them better and more dynamic is their system of engaging foes through opposed rush actions. You can actually avoid someone, which makes it feel more dynamic and less chess-like. Anyway, what it shares is the difficulty of tracking distance between multiple combatants. In the end, you will always have to draw a map, as it's so much easier. You don't need hexes/grid and exact distances, just divvy you map up into zones and map the rangebands onto them. The way we are currently running L5R is as follows: 1 move lets you move into an adjacent zone. Some zones require more to cross, depending on difficulty or size of the terrain. Generally you are considered to be at range 3 for all other characters. You need an extra rangeband move to get into engagement range, which is determined by the reach of your weapon, or your opponent's, whichever is greater. If that is beyond your engagement range, you need to spend another move to close that distance. So, for example, you are in the main street, hearing you companion cry out for help in a nearby alley. The zones are adjacent, so if you move 1 range band you can enter that, but you need to move another to engage the thug attempting to rob your friend. If the thug is wielding a spear, engagement range is 2, so you need to move 3 range bands in one move to be able to strike with your katana or fist. Seems to work for now.
  8. They used a similar system in Ex3 too. Which is why I can heartily recommend zones! It leaves the underlying mechanics intact and when running a more complex encounter your brain won't be leaking out of your ears when you look at some ridiculously complex diagram that tries to track the relative distances 10+ combatants are from each other.
  9. Well, let's just agree to disagree as we approach this from entirely different angles. Decoupling pc's and npc's opens up very interesting design space and gameplay opportunities on both sides of that divide and I personally do not mind sacrificing simulationism to get there. I don't care that the human npc has two or three times the fatigue that the pc's could possibly have, an extra action and the ability to shed the first three conditions inflicted upon it and some gruesome custom techniques if it would provide an exciting and nail-biting set-piece encounter (yes, d&d 4e is my favorite d&d, sue me). Granted, haven't really given human opponents the d&d 4e solo/elite treatment yet, but I wouldn't shy away from that. In my experience going the other route, where both use the same mechanics, such encounters become very built-focused and thus binary, a sort of rock-paper-scissors game, which I personally find rather dull, and likely makes the bigger fights very, very complex as everything is running on pc-level complexity. Different strokes and all!
  10. Nothing stops you from making your npc's like pc's I guess? Though calling it lazy game design I can not agree with. PC's and NPC's not mirroring each other is just a decision. Take for example D&D 4e where no NPC ever uses pc mechanics. That edition has been accused of all the sins under the sun, but not lazy game design at least.
  11. Eh, npc's have to conform to only one thing: will they be interesting, either as allies or antagonists and whatever scores or powers they need to achieve that are fair game. The same restrictions as for pc's are utterly unnecessary for that.
  12. Because they are not pc's? There is no reason to mirror everything pc's are subject to to npc's. If you want, sure, go ahead, but there is no need to do so.
  13. Current rules allow for a too much movement, I agree. Personally I prefer the zone system from FATE and that is how we have used it here as well, and other similar games like Ex3. Makes it much easier to track and visualize imho, and you can make some zones more difficult to cross than others, due to being larger or simply difficult ground, whatever.
  14. We had this thread about a million times already. You could find it in the original AEG forum, you can find in the FFG LCG forum and doubtless many other L5R fora. I also said L5R was not bad, you know. That means there are positive examples, for the artwork as well. But even in the 90's they did not go out of their way to actually be inclusive compared to other companies. I will address the question of characterization at the start of the game a bit however, as that is more interesting than retreading the art discussion. You say the women were made as the equal of the men in the story, but I disagree. It certainly did not start out that way, though it got better over time, it definitely did. Just putting emphasis on the last before you go and make my position more extreme than it actually is. Of the one's mentioned above, once they actually got story time Matsu Tsuko, Isawa Kaede, Mirumoto Hitomi and Ikoma Tsanuri were very strongly defined by the men in their lives, and it did not go both ways. To elaborate, for the longest time Hitomi's story was just about Yakamo. Actually, I will put it stronger, she was just a side character in Yakamo's story, and it was similar for most of the women in the story back then. The other three women above belong in Toturi's story/harem. No, the boys were very much the stars of the show, and it really took time before the women were developed into actual, stand-alone characters. Otaku Kamoko was better I believe, but I was never into the Unicorn I must admit and I don't quite remember when her story started getting interesting. Hida O'Ushi, who was also named, came into her own later on as well. A Good Little Wife was from the Ree Soesbee period, I believe. You'll certainly get no hate from me about Kachiko (except her art, most of it was horrid, but whatever). The story of Kachiko and Hoturi was actually fairly balanced, and she had other things going on beyond being hung up in one way or another on her man of choice.
×
×
  • Create New...